(21-07-2016 12:13 PM)Old Man Marsh Wrote: What're you going to do? Force the jobs upon those who do not want them? What will you do if they refuse?

Some of us observe non serviam.

You've heard of jury duty????

It's called "civic responsibility"....

......

One idea I had --- mandatory 2-4 years of public service --- as either military, police, or to be in a pool of potential public servants. (up to and including President) -- Military would be 2 year, police/fireman 4 year - and public servant pool - would be from 18 years of age to 65............... (meaning you don't do anything really - unless chosen -- but it's a 47 year commitment)...

edit to add...

If you want to opt out -- fine --- you go into a higher tax bracket....

The only problem with such a system is that most of these career require high level of specialised skills and experience. Not anybody can be a diplomate because they might require to speek fluently a foreign language and have good knowledge of a variety of complex issue, not to mention that most negociation last more tha 2 to 4 years. It's the same thing for detective work or command position in a modern army. The legislative prossess is also far from being simple and administrating a city requires an entire team of skilled managers. You might be able to do it for very simple, low ranks, job, but fr those requiring higher knowledge and experience, it might be much more complicated.

One idea I had --- mandatory 2-4 years of public service --- as either military, police, or to be in a pool of potential public servants. (up to and including President) -- Military would be 2 year, police/fireman 4 year - and public servant pool - would be from 18 years of age to 65............... (meaning you don't do anything really - unless chosen -- but it's a 47 year commitment)...

edit to add...

If you want to opt out -- fine --- you go into a higher tax bracket....

The only problem with such a system is that most of these career require high level of specialised skills and experience. Not anybody can be a diplomate because they might require to speek fluently a foreign language and have good knowledge of a variety of complex issue, not to mention that most negociation last more tha 2 to 4 years. It's the same thing for detective work or command position in a modern army. The legislative prossess is also far from being simple and administrating a city requires an entire team of skilled managers. You might be able to do it for very simple, low ranks, job, but fr those requiring higher knowledge and experience, it might be much more complicated.

1. Diplomats are not elected --they are appointed... Not an issue.
2. There's "grunt jobs" in the military, the police and fire departments. People could opt for the grunt job - OR take training for advanced jobs.

We're not going to eliminate the professionals in the military or police/fire depts -- but augment them it other people.....

As far as politicians being replaced by "ordinary people" -- we do that all the time now.... We've had Presidents that had such jobs as shoe salesman, actor and peanut farmer.....

(21-07-2016 03:06 PM)epronovost Wrote: The only problem with such a system is that most of these career require high level of specialised skills and experience. Not anybody can be a diplomate because they might require to speek fluently a foreign language and have good knowledge of a variety of complex issue, not to mention that most negociation last more tha 2 to 4 years. It's the same thing for detective work or command position in a modern army. The legislative prossess is also far from being simple and administrating a city requires an entire team of skilled managers. You might be able to do it for very simple, low ranks, job, but fr those requiring higher knowledge and experience, it might be much more complicated.

1. Diplomats are not elected --they are appointed... Not an issue.
2. There's "grunt jobs" in the military, the police and fire departments. People could opt for the grunt job - OR take training for advanced jobs.

We're not going to eliminate the professionals in the military or police/fire depts -- but augment them it other people.....

As far as politicians being replaced by "ordinary people" -- we do that all the time now.... We've had Presidents that had such jobs as shoe salesman, actor and peanut farmer.....

We did OK....

I don't know who the shoe salesman was, but to be fair, both Carter and Reagan were governors before becoming president, so they weren't totally without political experience. And it could be argued whether or not we did OK under either of them...

(21-07-2016 12:13 PM)Old Man Marsh Wrote: What're you going to do? Force the jobs upon those who do not want them? What will you do if they refuse?

Some of us observe non serviam.

You've heard of jury duty????

It's called "civic responsibility"....

......

One idea I had --- mandatory 2-4 years of public service --- as either military, police, or to be in a pool of potential public servants. (up to and including President) -- Military would be 2 year, police/fireman 4 year - and public servant pool - would be from 18 years of age to 65............... (meaning you don't do anything really - unless chosen -- but it's a 47 year commitment)...

edit to add...

If you want to opt out -- fine --- you go into a higher tax bracket....

I like you, OB.

...but I'm really glad that you're not in charge.

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

(21-07-2016 03:06 PM)epronovost Wrote: The only problem with such a system is that most of these career require high level of specialised skills and experience. Not anybody can be a diplomate because they might require to speek fluently a foreign language and have good knowledge of a variety of complex issue, not to mention that most negociation last more tha 2 to 4 years. It's the same thing for detective work or command position in a modern army. The legislative prossess is also far from being simple and administrating a city requires an entire team of skilled managers. You might be able to do it for very simple, low ranks, job, but fr those requiring higher knowledge and experience, it might be much more complicated.

1. Diplomats are not elected --they are appointed... Not an issue.
2. There's "grunt jobs" in the military, the police and fire departments. People could opt for the grunt job - OR take training for advanced jobs.

We're not going to eliminate the professionals in the military or police/fire depts -- but augment them it other people.....

As far as politicians being replaced by "ordinary people" -- we do that all the time now.... We've had Presidents that had such jobs as shoe salesman, actor and peanut farmer.....

We did OK....

Have a lottery system. Everybody's name in the basket. Pull out one for president every four years or changeit to 5 years, the same for congress and every other political job.

Positions of power don't solely attract megalomaniacs who are unfit to wield it by their very nature. There have been some good presidents, congressmen, senators, and dog catchers. The problem is that many of the people who are attracted to positions of power are entirely unsuited by reason of power lust and are good at hiding that.

What we need is a better screening process. I suugest a debating format involving several its of acid and a cardboard cut-out of their opponent.

---

Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.